When I first watched Simple Pickup, I was completely grossed out by the How to Get Laid By Setting Up Your Room video. (Look it up on YouTube).
One keeps a bottle of alcohol around, just in case the girl he's with isn't relaxed and he wants to get her to open up. Literally.
One keeps a head massager around, to make her feel good.
One makes sure the one chair in his room has random things on it so that the girl he's with has nowhere to sit but his bed.
Some of these suggestions are slightly appalling to me. Or were at first.
But at the same time, these guys are offering tips. I'm sure that these suggestions work on plenty of girls; girls who may come from loving families, are good students or employees, girls who work hard at what they do and want to spend some alone time with a guy that they like.
However, I've been noticing that these "guys" label their videos targeting "girls". Not women. Not ladies. Girls. These videos seem like your average college I-need-to-get-laid-fast-how-do-you-do-it type videos. Although I'm put off by the manipulation that goes in to making your room ready for play-time, it kind of makes sense. We all have needs, and these guys are sharing some times that will hopefully help their viewers achieve that special moment of bliss.
HOWEVER!!! I am terribly disturbed by "God Mode". They describe God mode as the moment where everything is going right, you click with this girl and she's picking up on your vibes; she seems really interested in you.
I'm not religious, but there has to be a better way to explain this rather than including God. Sorry, guys, but you're not all-knowing, all-powerful, and you can't make a cyclone. I'm sure those are all requirements for God.
And what was that about "bitch butterflies"? I hope you're not referring to what I think you are. Oh phew! They're only talking about men being "little bitches" if they don't approach someone they think is attractive. Way to go guys! Way to think positive. P.S. Please don't ever link being weak to the feminine. It makes you look uneducated.
Hmm. On second thought, these are probably the guys I would avoid. Maybe it's just my super-high expectations. But is it really so unreasonable to expect someone who is willing to just be themselves around you? Someone who doesn't make the rounds by throwing himself at every girl at the bar or club, but goes for the person they are the most interested in, even if it doesn't work out? I will admire someone more for their natural vibe than their showmanship or tricks.
True, you cannot prescribe any advice that will be true for all groups of people. I just prefer my men to be natural. I can tell if you're interested. You don't need to make it obvious by suggesting a massage on your bed. Treat me as an equal and then we can really talk. Otherwise, have fun with your lotion.
Tuesday 11 December 2012
Sunday 9 December 2012
I AM *mumblemumblemumble*
I made a recent acquaintance today that made me question why we stand up for things.
This person was an activist. I have heard they are socially and politically aware, which was also demonstrated by the red square being pinned to their shirt in addition to a rainbow Islamic symbol. However, we began to ponder how we would act if one of our elders had slandered another culture by calling them a derogatory title.
I know I have a very privileged upbringing. I have a blog where I can declare my thoughts as a woman; I consider that to be quite privileged considering other places in the world where women don't have access to books let alone the internet. I believe it is my duty as a citizen of this Earth to help correct the wrong-doings. Socially, politically, and environmentally. I believe we all need to do what we can to protect and preserve our way of life and the lives of all other living things surrounding us. To do this, there must be a level of respect. Old dogs can learn new tricks, they just need time.
Maybe I'm being too optimistic, but I've noticed a change in my father, and I think it is my liberal beliefs that are slowly changing him. He may not agree with what I have to say, but he respects me enough to limit any offensive comments that were considered acceptable or cool back in the day. I do not hesitate to ask people to keep their slanderous comments to themselves, even if I know they will continue to use that same language. It is important to me to respect others with whom I share this planet with. It starts with the everyday language we use.
The acquaintance I met today said they would never speak up because, in their culture, it is not appropriate to do so, and you would risk losing face within your community. I understand this, but being a part of a social activist group and then taking no risks for your beliefs at home is almost traitorous to me.
I love my family, and I should like to think they love me to. Part of loving someone is respecting who they are, which includes their beliefs. If you are someone who can walk around in public with a rainbow Islam symbol on your t-shirt, but can't admit to your family that calling someone an offensive name makes you uncomfortable, why are you an activist? Your family is the toughest group of people to face up to; if you can face your family, and gain their support human being to human being, you've got nothing to lose.
If any of my family members asks me if I'm a feminist, I gladly say that I am. I let them have their assumptions and their sly comments because I am comfortable knowing that I am not a bra-burner; I do not believe in females being superior to males; I do not believe in gender inequality. I am who I am. Being a feminist is one part of me. They need to accept that, because I have.
This person was an activist. I have heard they are socially and politically aware, which was also demonstrated by the red square being pinned to their shirt in addition to a rainbow Islamic symbol. However, we began to ponder how we would act if one of our elders had slandered another culture by calling them a derogatory title.
I know I have a very privileged upbringing. I have a blog where I can declare my thoughts as a woman; I consider that to be quite privileged considering other places in the world where women don't have access to books let alone the internet. I believe it is my duty as a citizen of this Earth to help correct the wrong-doings. Socially, politically, and environmentally. I believe we all need to do what we can to protect and preserve our way of life and the lives of all other living things surrounding us. To do this, there must be a level of respect. Old dogs can learn new tricks, they just need time.
Maybe I'm being too optimistic, but I've noticed a change in my father, and I think it is my liberal beliefs that are slowly changing him. He may not agree with what I have to say, but he respects me enough to limit any offensive comments that were considered acceptable or cool back in the day. I do not hesitate to ask people to keep their slanderous comments to themselves, even if I know they will continue to use that same language. It is important to me to respect others with whom I share this planet with. It starts with the everyday language we use.
The acquaintance I met today said they would never speak up because, in their culture, it is not appropriate to do so, and you would risk losing face within your community. I understand this, but being a part of a social activist group and then taking no risks for your beliefs at home is almost traitorous to me.
I love my family, and I should like to think they love me to. Part of loving someone is respecting who they are, which includes their beliefs. If you are someone who can walk around in public with a rainbow Islam symbol on your t-shirt, but can't admit to your family that calling someone an offensive name makes you uncomfortable, why are you an activist? Your family is the toughest group of people to face up to; if you can face your family, and gain their support human being to human being, you've got nothing to lose.
If any of my family members asks me if I'm a feminist, I gladly say that I am. I let them have their assumptions and their sly comments because I am comfortable knowing that I am not a bra-burner; I do not believe in females being superior to males; I do not believe in gender inequality. I am who I am. Being a feminist is one part of me. They need to accept that, because I have.
Sunday 18 November 2012
N is for Leader
Graphic language warning!!!
"I am your leader, yes, I am your leader. If you're no believer, suck a big dick."
I'd like to say the only music I like is neurologically stimulating; that I only listen to symphonies and Indie bands. Unfortunately I'm hooked on lyrics like the ones above or "Star ships are meant to fly, hands up and touch the sky" and "Yo what I gotta do to show these bitches that I own 'em".
Yes, I am a Nicki Minaj fan. But the song that I've been thinking about lately is I Am Your Leader.
The lyrics featured above got me to thinking today. As a female rapper, Nicki, and others before and after her, has had a rough time throught her musical career. In one YouTube video I watched she explains the difference between a powerful man and a powerful woman in the biz. The man is "bossed up", while the woman is a bitch. Hardly fair when both genders are doing the same amount of work and wielding the same amount of power.
Nicki and the characters she creates push boundaries. The song I am your leader features her in a dollhouse-like setting in various costumes and wigs. It's like a cartoon in watermelon colours. But what I really love about this song is the message, which I interpret to be "I am a leader in women's careers, including but not limited to male dominated careers; if you don't like it, assume your previous occupation and pay homage to the penis, because I will not concern myself with you".
Cheers Nicki. If only I could say that to people without them being completely offended.
"I am your leader, yes, I am your leader. If you're no believer, suck a big dick."
I'd like to say the only music I like is neurologically stimulating; that I only listen to symphonies and Indie bands. Unfortunately I'm hooked on lyrics like the ones above or "Star ships are meant to fly, hands up and touch the sky" and "Yo what I gotta do to show these bitches that I own 'em".
Yes, I am a Nicki Minaj fan. But the song that I've been thinking about lately is I Am Your Leader.
The lyrics featured above got me to thinking today. As a female rapper, Nicki, and others before and after her, has had a rough time throught her musical career. In one YouTube video I watched she explains the difference between a powerful man and a powerful woman in the biz. The man is "bossed up", while the woman is a bitch. Hardly fair when both genders are doing the same amount of work and wielding the same amount of power.
Nicki and the characters she creates push boundaries. The song I am your leader features her in a dollhouse-like setting in various costumes and wigs. It's like a cartoon in watermelon colours. But what I really love about this song is the message, which I interpret to be "I am a leader in women's careers, including but not limited to male dominated careers; if you don't like it, assume your previous occupation and pay homage to the penis, because I will not concern myself with you".
Cheers Nicki. If only I could say that to people without them being completely offended.
Tuesday 28 August 2012
Go Carley Rae!
A couple friends of mine mentioned the poor quality of Carley Rae Jepsen's music video for Call Me Maybe and how ridiculous it is that the man, whose affections Ms. Carley is trying to win, (spoiler alert) turns out to be gay.
I disagree. It's a cheesy video, but how many music videos feature someone, openly gay, hitting on someone of the same sex? I think it's a funny twist that not only supports same sex flirting/dating/relationships, but makes fun of heterosexual ways of thinking. Wouldn't we dislike the video more if she got the guy? Wouldn't it be boring? I certainly think so.
Take a Taylor Swift video, say Love Story for example. Typical heterosexual boy-girl interactions. They fall in love, he has to go, he comes back, they get married. In no way am I saying that Taylor Swift is homophobic, but her video is representative of a set of beliefs that has been around for a while.
Now Carley Rae makes fun of this idea the romantic heterosexual boy-girl meet cute, immortalized in song and film. On one level it's sad that the girl can't and will never snag the guy; on the other hand, it's humourous because some women can relate to crushing on a guy, but get shut down when she finds out he's gay. Carley is calling attention to other sexual orientations in pop music videos. It's not just Lady Gaga who's got her eye on representing the LGBT community.
Next stop: Justin Bieber featuring drag kings and queens!
I disagree. It's a cheesy video, but how many music videos feature someone, openly gay, hitting on someone of the same sex? I think it's a funny twist that not only supports same sex flirting/dating/relationships, but makes fun of heterosexual ways of thinking. Wouldn't we dislike the video more if she got the guy? Wouldn't it be boring? I certainly think so.
Take a Taylor Swift video, say Love Story for example. Typical heterosexual boy-girl interactions. They fall in love, he has to go, he comes back, they get married. In no way am I saying that Taylor Swift is homophobic, but her video is representative of a set of beliefs that has been around for a while.
Now Carley Rae makes fun of this idea the romantic heterosexual boy-girl meet cute, immortalized in song and film. On one level it's sad that the girl can't and will never snag the guy; on the other hand, it's humourous because some women can relate to crushing on a guy, but get shut down when she finds out he's gay. Carley is calling attention to other sexual orientations in pop music videos. It's not just Lady Gaga who's got her eye on representing the LGBT community.
Next stop: Justin Bieber featuring drag kings and queens!
Wednesday 11 July 2012
Heart Harp
The first heartstring severs.
Blood bursts out; a burbling brook of
memories, sex, and love.
There goes number two;
limbs twist and scuttle in
to fill the aching, breaking pieces.
The third snaps
lashing my brain for re-hashing thoughts of
you and me and me and us.
The fourth whips around
to lick my face
where you kiss me goodnight.
Five and six send you flying free.
I am left, a bleeding, broken,
bruised and busted body.
Blood bursts out; a burbling brook of
memories, sex, and love.
There goes number two;
limbs twist and scuttle in
to fill the aching, breaking pieces.
The third snaps
lashing my brain for re-hashing thoughts of
you and me and me and us.
The fourth whips around
to lick my face
where you kiss me goodnight.
Five and six send you flying free.
I am left, a bleeding, broken,
bruised and busted body.
The Tiny Blue Room
Silence.
In the tiny blue room.
It's when you choke on your voice
and there's no noise
that can break it down.
You fling your body against the walls
only to leave red stains; and the footfalls
of dancing flies can be found.
So you decay minute by minute
and no matter how you spin it
the maggots will continue to feed on your soul.
In silence.
In the tiny blue room.
Saturday 7 July 2012
Zombie Love
I'm 6 feet under.
I want to claw my way out
But the grave digger's packed it down.
I long for the touch of your hand
The kiss of the sun
But I'm 6 feet under
underneath feelings.
I want to claw my way out
But the grave digger's packed it down.
I long for the touch of your hand
The kiss of the sun
But I'm 6 feet under
underneath feelings.
Friday 6 July 2012
To Bob Barker
I heard on the radio this morning that Bob Barker, host of The Price is Right and animal rights activist, has been saying the the Calgary Stampede promotes cruelty to animals; to which I can only reply:
GET A LIFE!
Barker put Alberta on the map, when he protested the Edmonton Zoo for keeping Lucy, an old elephant, rather than sending her to a more natural habitat.
1. Lucy is freaking old. She will probably not make the trip AND
2. Even if she does, she will have lost everything and everyone that she knows in addition to not knowing how to live in such a different environment.
3. The cost of transporting a really old elephant that may die enroute anyways is ridiculous. (Also, from what I hear, the Edmonton Zoo will not be acquiring any more animals non-native to the praries. Hopefully.)
Now, Barker is sticking his nose in to Alberta once again, claiming that a 100-year-old festival is cruel towards animals. Again, let's be honest; perhaps the Stampede is not the best form of loving our furry friends, but think about this:
Barker could be protesting the way humans farm animals; in order to produce more, fattier meats, humans have essentially eliminated any grazing or open areas in the farms that produce chickens for large processors. They're locked in cages or small pens, in completely un-hygienic conditions which enable the spread of disease rapidly.
Barker could be promoting healthier farming, supporting small, independent farmers who still allow their cattle to graze, their chickens to run free, etc. But he's not.
Barker is picking on one of the smallest issues this world has. By choosing this course of action, Barker is drawing attention away from REAL suffering of animals at the hands of humans. People knock hunting, saying it's harsh and cold-blooded. What is more cold blooded than penning animals up so you can have a fatty steak at the end of your hard day behind a desk?
Barker wants to be an animal rights activist does he? I think he should go back to when animals were first domesticated; that was when cruelty REALLY began.
GET A LIFE!
Barker put Alberta on the map, when he protested the Edmonton Zoo for keeping Lucy, an old elephant, rather than sending her to a more natural habitat.
1. Lucy is freaking old. She will probably not make the trip AND
2. Even if she does, she will have lost everything and everyone that she knows in addition to not knowing how to live in such a different environment.
3. The cost of transporting a really old elephant that may die enroute anyways is ridiculous. (Also, from what I hear, the Edmonton Zoo will not be acquiring any more animals non-native to the praries. Hopefully.)
Now, Barker is sticking his nose in to Alberta once again, claiming that a 100-year-old festival is cruel towards animals. Again, let's be honest; perhaps the Stampede is not the best form of loving our furry friends, but think about this:
Barker could be protesting the way humans farm animals; in order to produce more, fattier meats, humans have essentially eliminated any grazing or open areas in the farms that produce chickens for large processors. They're locked in cages or small pens, in completely un-hygienic conditions which enable the spread of disease rapidly.
Barker could be promoting healthier farming, supporting small, independent farmers who still allow their cattle to graze, their chickens to run free, etc. But he's not.
Barker is picking on one of the smallest issues this world has. By choosing this course of action, Barker is drawing attention away from REAL suffering of animals at the hands of humans. People knock hunting, saying it's harsh and cold-blooded. What is more cold blooded than penning animals up so you can have a fatty steak at the end of your hard day behind a desk?
Barker wants to be an animal rights activist does he? I think he should go back to when animals were first domesticated; that was when cruelty REALLY began.
Slightly off topic, INCREDIBLY ridiculous
Imagine that you live in a place where you find the occasional spider meandering through, doing its daily (or nightly) routine; that you invite your best friend over to watch a favourite childhood movie and catch up; that she finds a large (not really) spider in your bathroom. Imagine you're both terrified of spiders.
Imagine you take an old plastic container and trap the spider; you shove the container into a corner so your friend can go to the bathroom and feel secure that the spider will not crawl on her; you both decide to put it out of your minds and begin the movie.
Imagine the movie ends and you've both got one thing on your mind: the GIANT spider; you start talking in hopes that the spider will die in its plastic tomb before you even think about getting up to check. Imagine it's still alive.
Imagine you decide to arm yourself with a rolled up newspaper and a spray bottle full of rubbing alcohol; you get into your shower (in order to protect yourself from said creepy-crawly) and crouch down, ready to strike when you lift the container. Imagine you're too frightened to lift the container.
Imagine your friend offers to crouch on the toilet and hold the spray bottle in case the spider manages to dodge your lethal newspaper blows; you stay there for at least two minutes trying to muster up the courage to remove the plastic container; you count 3... 2... 1!
BAM! spritz spritz BAM! BAM!
Amy and Friend: 1 Spidey: 0
House Down
An original poem by A. Chow
It slides besides your insides
Devours your heart and mind
Whispers fears and jeers into your ears
And you are blinded by the shadow.
The fire it breathes fumes and consumes
Leaving no room
for thoughts of peace
crying to get out like forgotten children.
crying to get out like forgotten children.
The devil offers his hand
Like a gentleman
You start to stand
But your knees give out
And you want to shout
But it won’t come out
Til’ tears start rollin and you’ve no hope left.
So you pour on gasoline
And dream
Of a better place…
But you’re really just burning your house down.
Friday 29 June 2012
Man-KIND
Since I've been paying more attention to gender and feminist topics, I've come across many negative comments coming from and aiming at Feminists. It's either, "men have dominated women even before civilization began, and it's time for women to take back the power; to have power OVER men", or, "Feminists are angry; all they want is to kill off all the men; they say they want equality, but all they really want is to punish men".
Take it from this Feminist: True feminist values lie in equality.
I'm always shocked when I hear people have no idea where feminism came from. It came from a time when women were not allowed to have a public life; they couldn't work, they couldn't speak in public, they couldn't lead, they couldn't vote - heck! They couldn't wear pants! Feminism came from the desire for women to be equal to men, never more than that.
No matter what people say, women today are not equal to men. There are women around the world who are beaten, raped, and subjected to a plethora of demeaning acts. Women in some countries still do not have the same rights as men. I am appalled when I hear that some women are not allowed to learn their alphabet.
However, I have also noticed this: very few feminists speak about men. Men are held to similar high standards that women are. They have been taught not to show emotion, that being a homosexual is a crime or disgusting (where women are encouraged because it's "hot"), and they are expected to be the head of the household. Men are judged just as harshly as women are, though probably not in the same ways.
I don't pity one gender over the other; I pity both. How have we come to such an extraordinary state where we expect so many broad character traits from so many individual people, with different ways and walks of life? What is missing?
Kindness.
Wednesday 27 June 2012
BRAVE review
My very good friend and I went to see a movie called Brave. It's about a Scottish princess who desires to be her own person, not conforming to traditional princess standards. She rides her horse, explores the nearby forest, climbs great pillars of rocks, and practices archery.
It is an incredibly heart-warming movie with a fantastic message for adults and children alike. Here's what I think:
The main character, Merida, displays courage, curiosity, compassion, fire, and many other admirable qualities. She has heart and gumption, but she also has the impulsivity and the emotional swings of a child. This film captures the coming-of-age of Merida; although the movie only covers two days she gains so much maturity! Merida was one of the best female protagonists I've seen in a long time. *TINY SPOILER ALERT* The most striking comment from her early on in the movie is "I'm not ready", referring to her impending marriage to one of the men from the neighboring clans. It is so great to hear a young girl say she's not ready to get married. I see married couples getting younger and younger, I hear that they have never lived together, never spent quality time together as a couple, don't have the financial means to support themselves (let alone pay for the expenses of their wedding by themselves), and are don't understand what it means to be completely committed to someone (especially when you really, really can't stand what they do sometimes). Merida shows us that it's okay to want to live out our youth, it's okay to not want marriage; it doesn't make us bad people, it just means that we're mature enough to give up a part of ourselves to be with someone else.
This movie shows a young girl voicing her concerns, and her parents struggling with accepting their daughter as the stubborn youth she is. This movie is humorous, thoughtful, and great fun. Any one will be able to connect with this film. Yes she wears a dress, but she rocks it!
Five gigantic stars for this movie! Pixar-Disney did a fantastic job in bringing princess stories into the future. Next up, a homosexual prince?
It is an incredibly heart-warming movie with a fantastic message for adults and children alike. Here's what I think:
The main character, Merida, displays courage, curiosity, compassion, fire, and many other admirable qualities. She has heart and gumption, but she also has the impulsivity and the emotional swings of a child. This film captures the coming-of-age of Merida; although the movie only covers two days she gains so much maturity! Merida was one of the best female protagonists I've seen in a long time. *TINY SPOILER ALERT* The most striking comment from her early on in the movie is "I'm not ready", referring to her impending marriage to one of the men from the neighboring clans. It is so great to hear a young girl say she's not ready to get married. I see married couples getting younger and younger, I hear that they have never lived together, never spent quality time together as a couple, don't have the financial means to support themselves (let alone pay for the expenses of their wedding by themselves), and are don't understand what it means to be completely committed to someone (especially when you really, really can't stand what they do sometimes). Merida shows us that it's okay to want to live out our youth, it's okay to not want marriage; it doesn't make us bad people, it just means that we're mature enough to give up a part of ourselves to be with someone else.
This movie shows a young girl voicing her concerns, and her parents struggling with accepting their daughter as the stubborn youth she is. This movie is humorous, thoughtful, and great fun. Any one will be able to connect with this film. Yes she wears a dress, but she rocks it!
Five gigantic stars for this movie! Pixar-Disney did a fantastic job in bringing princess stories into the future. Next up, a homosexual prince?
Monday 25 June 2012
Freud's Guide to Being a Good Mother Part 1
Welcome to Freud's Guide to Being a Good Mother (Edition 1)!
Before becoming a successful mother to needy, somewhat psychotic children who will never let you go or let you have a moment of peace, you must become a good housewife. Here are some simple steps to get you on your way to being a bored-out-of-her-mind housewife:
1. Do not attempt to achieve a high level of education. This hampers acquiring a husband. Men do not like intelligent women as it castrates them, makes them feel emasculated. Your husband will be able to provide for you financially, emotionally, sexually, psychologically, etcetera; so why carry on with difficult subjects like politics, social sciences, humanities, arts, math, science, when you can educate yourself through your marriage in cooking, cleaning, sewing, community, and child psychology! Forget the world outside your front door! It's far too complicated and aggressive for the meek and mild demeanour of women. If you must carry on through high school or even university or college, God forbid, focus on attracting men with your sense of fashion, your put-togetherness, and your charming femininity.
2. Do not attempt to find or keep a job. Once again, you'll find your husband will be much more appreciative and loving if you abandon any thought of working. Think of it as an early retirement. You've worked hard to get your man, and now that you have you can relax knowing all you have to do is keep your home neat and tidy. If you are looking for a social experience without the pressures of earning money (what a ghastly thought! A woman hoping to earn something for her work besides admiration and love of her husband), look into volunteering with the rest of the community housewives. Perhaps you can help run a cake walk, a bake sale, a community mixer. The possibilities are endless!
NOTE: If you must work, only apply to jobs that suit your femininity and are part-time. A husband does not want a wife that enjoys her job or desires to achieve a higher status in her working environment. Remember: a husband wants a wife that does everything she can to support his masculinity, not dampen it!
3. Find the joy in cleaning and cooking for your husband. This simple act of charity says nothing more than your eternal pledge of love to your husband. Why, darning his socks and ironing his pants means, "I wish you all the best in life, my dearest!" Everything you do is for him, for your marriage, for your future.
4. Don't forget your God! He's a man too, you know! You should always strive to include your love of God in all his glory in your daily life. Perhaps when you're washing dishes, give thanks to your running water, your dishes and your soap.
With these simple steps, your life will become chocablock full of devotion to the men in your life: your God, your husband, and, of course, Sigmund Freud. Remember, you, as a female, do not have the capability to understand and act in the world outside the home as men do. It is in your best interest as a future wife and mother to remain in the home, study up on latest fashion trends, the best pie crusts, and always have his slippers ready when he gets home.
Happy housewife-ing!
Before becoming a successful mother to needy, somewhat psychotic children who will never let you go or let you have a moment of peace, you must become a good housewife. Here are some simple steps to get you on your way to being a bored-out-of-her-mind housewife:
1. Do not attempt to achieve a high level of education. This hampers acquiring a husband. Men do not like intelligent women as it castrates them, makes them feel emasculated. Your husband will be able to provide for you financially, emotionally, sexually, psychologically, etcetera; so why carry on with difficult subjects like politics, social sciences, humanities, arts, math, science, when you can educate yourself through your marriage in cooking, cleaning, sewing, community, and child psychology! Forget the world outside your front door! It's far too complicated and aggressive for the meek and mild demeanour of women. If you must carry on through high school or even university or college, God forbid, focus on attracting men with your sense of fashion, your put-togetherness, and your charming femininity.
2. Do not attempt to find or keep a job. Once again, you'll find your husband will be much more appreciative and loving if you abandon any thought of working. Think of it as an early retirement. You've worked hard to get your man, and now that you have you can relax knowing all you have to do is keep your home neat and tidy. If you are looking for a social experience without the pressures of earning money (what a ghastly thought! A woman hoping to earn something for her work besides admiration and love of her husband), look into volunteering with the rest of the community housewives. Perhaps you can help run a cake walk, a bake sale, a community mixer. The possibilities are endless!
NOTE: If you must work, only apply to jobs that suit your femininity and are part-time. A husband does not want a wife that enjoys her job or desires to achieve a higher status in her working environment. Remember: a husband wants a wife that does everything she can to support his masculinity, not dampen it!
3. Find the joy in cleaning and cooking for your husband. This simple act of charity says nothing more than your eternal pledge of love to your husband. Why, darning his socks and ironing his pants means, "I wish you all the best in life, my dearest!" Everything you do is for him, for your marriage, for your future.
4. Don't forget your God! He's a man too, you know! You should always strive to include your love of God in all his glory in your daily life. Perhaps when you're washing dishes, give thanks to your running water, your dishes and your soap.
With these simple steps, your life will become chocablock full of devotion to the men in your life: your God, your husband, and, of course, Sigmund Freud. Remember, you, as a female, do not have the capability to understand and act in the world outside the home as men do. It is in your best interest as a future wife and mother to remain in the home, study up on latest fashion trends, the best pie crusts, and always have his slippers ready when he gets home.
Happy housewife-ing!
Saturday 16 June 2012
Wedding bells are ringing
"Early student marriage is domesticating boys so early they don't have a chance for full intellectual development." (Betty Friedan, Feminine Mystique, pg 181)
I feel that many people are fearful or somewhat hateful of feminists because of what stereotypically comes with the label. But seeing this quote made me feel hopeful; maybe people will see that feminism has evolved to be inclusive of equality between the genders.
This quote comes from the section of Friedan's book that discusses the impact ambition and education had on young women in the 50s. She explores the idea that women in the 50s stifled their academic futures because they believed that A) men would not like women who wanted a career or would not like to stay at home all day, B) they were afraid of having an uncertain future (unlike forming a stable home), or C) all of the men would be married by the time women had found careers. But Friedan struck me with a lighting bolt when she mentioned that men also felt the same early marriage anxiety. Men also desired a stable home life, especially after World War II, but were also being held back by early marriage.
For me, this recognition of the men's futures suffering due to student marriages is going above and beyond the initial cause of feminism. Not many people think or know of this, but Feminism originated because women desired to be a part of a larger world outside the home; they wanted to speak in public, go to school, begin careers of their own, make a difference in the world. The reason why it's called "feminism" was because women wanted the same rights men had; it was about bringing women's rights up to the same level as men's rights.
Friedan's comment about men's ambition also being hampered by early marriage, similar to women, made me realize that equality is really at the root of feminism; and even more so today! Women around the world do not experience the same level of rights as men, so I believe there is still a need for feminism. Feminism is not about breaking men down to experience the previous oppression of women in years gone-by; feminism is about gender equality. Feminism is about women making decisions, having ambitious goals, and achieving as much as men do. The promotion of women's achievements should continue to happen, but only to show the growth of equality between men and women.
Thursday 14 June 2012
Ms. May hits it out of the park... hopefully
Bill C-38
Even the title sounds horribly boring; perfect for a political document, no? You will probably never see a bill titled "The Canadian Government's Shit-hole Maze Bill to give the Opposition the Run-Around In Order to Get What Prime Minister Harper Wants".
I'm not terribly interested in reading up on specific bills, even if they do GREATLY impact my life and my world, but I like to listen to what comes around through the grapevine, and what I heard about this particular bill was atrocious.
It's a 420 page document (Conservative: Win; very, very, very few people will take the time to read a 420 page document if it's not for fun) and contains a ridiculous variety of bills and amendments (Conservative: Win; people who happen to read the entire Omnibus bill - as it's known as - will pick out the parts they don't like and leave the parts they do, causing confusion within parties, communities, etc). The Conservative government did very well, the New Democrats attempted to pick out specific parts of the Omnibus bill to contest, though many of their objections would probably not pass; then Elizabeth May gave the speech of her life.
Elizabeth May is the leader of the Canadian Green Party and the only member of her party to be elected to Parliament. She recently wrote a speech condemning the Omnibus bill due to it's scrambled nature, BUT May's speech found a crack in the seemingly stone-cold bill: a true omnibus bill must have a theme for all the proposed bills; Bill C-38, May says, has absolutely no theme and that the proposals it contains are all over the map.
Now, Parliament is going through a "slow-vote"; this means that Members of Parliament will vote on more than 100 bills contained in the Omnibus bill. At the end of the day, who knows what will happen. Hopefully the Speaker will keep in mind Elizabeth May's encouraging and empowering letter and save Canada from the horrible, environment crushing C-38.
P.S.
Note how it takes a woman, representing her party with only one seat, to find the fundamental issue with this mish-mash of a bill. Whoo hoo!
Even the title sounds horribly boring; perfect for a political document, no? You will probably never see a bill titled "The Canadian Government's Shit-hole Maze Bill to give the Opposition the Run-Around In Order to Get What Prime Minister Harper Wants".
I'm not terribly interested in reading up on specific bills, even if they do GREATLY impact my life and my world, but I like to listen to what comes around through the grapevine, and what I heard about this particular bill was atrocious.
It's a 420 page document (Conservative: Win; very, very, very few people will take the time to read a 420 page document if it's not for fun) and contains a ridiculous variety of bills and amendments (Conservative: Win; people who happen to read the entire Omnibus bill - as it's known as - will pick out the parts they don't like and leave the parts they do, causing confusion within parties, communities, etc). The Conservative government did very well, the New Democrats attempted to pick out specific parts of the Omnibus bill to contest, though many of their objections would probably not pass; then Elizabeth May gave the speech of her life.
Elizabeth May is the leader of the Canadian Green Party and the only member of her party to be elected to Parliament. She recently wrote a speech condemning the Omnibus bill due to it's scrambled nature, BUT May's speech found a crack in the seemingly stone-cold bill: a true omnibus bill must have a theme for all the proposed bills; Bill C-38, May says, has absolutely no theme and that the proposals it contains are all over the map.
Now, Parliament is going through a "slow-vote"; this means that Members of Parliament will vote on more than 100 bills contained in the Omnibus bill. At the end of the day, who knows what will happen. Hopefully the Speaker will keep in mind Elizabeth May's encouraging and empowering letter and save Canada from the horrible, environment crushing C-38.
P.S.
Note how it takes a woman, representing her party with only one seat, to find the fundamental issue with this mish-mash of a bill. Whoo hoo!
Monday 4 June 2012
A Doll House
"Playing House"
Perhaps you've heard or spoken this phrase. Perhaps it's been used to refer to a child's game of pretending to be a mother or father, wife or husband, etc participating in household activities. I've heard it a few times referring to relationships, and a thought occurred to me the other day: Do we ever stop playing House?
Whenever I've played house, there's usually a "Mommy", "Daddy", "Baby", and there could be "Sister", referring to the "Baby"'s sister. Sometimes there would be a "Puppy". I will say my school supported heterosexual relationships, at the time I attended; however, if a male was not interested in playing a female would usually assume the role of Daddy. Occasionally, there was no Daddy. Usually, during the game, Daddy went to work, Mommy did the cooking, grocery shopping, cleaning, and attending to Baby, Sister, and Puppy. Baby, Sister, and Puppy would place and intentionally create problems for Mommy. Daddy would come home from work, Mommy would make dinner, and put Baby, Sister and Puppy to bed.
This all sounds like a 50s dream. But in reality, how many of our mothers and fathers do this? And how many of us will continue to do some, if not all, of these actions? Some children play House like some children play Hunting or align their sled dogs. Children learn by imitation, and through imitation they learn relationships, roles and skills. Being Mommy and pretending to cook isn't far off what we do in North American and European cultures, though the role will most likely be different in various schools, in various towns or cities, in various parts around the world.
My House experience, looking back on it, is terribly patriarchal and horribly unfair to Mommy who doesn't get to go to work. But in reality, playing Mommy was usually the funnest because there was so much to do. No one really knew how to play "Daddy" because work was so mysterious. And you'd usually end up playing Work away from the rest of the House group. But for me, House wasn't an accurate representation of life. It was just a way to imitate, and practice, the skills that I had been seeing in my own home. I rarely went to my father's work, and when I did, I would often sneak around his office than watch him work. My mother also had full-time office work, but on weekends, or if she stayed home because I was sick, I would often see her in "Mommy"-like action. My mother would cook and clean, go grocery shopping, play with my sister and I, visit her brothers and sisters, and help provide for our family. Back then, I took for granted what my mother would do on a regular basis. But now I see she's a bit of a superhero!
But homes are changing and there is no shame in expecting to share more responsibilities between partners. But despite the titles of Mommy and Daddy, the functions of the roles in the game House are still relevant. We never stop playing house because we will always be practising, imitating, and reinventing ways to do things. Even though we may be cooking on a real stove, we will always be imitating our parents or that chef on T.V, or maybe our partner. We probably won't have the perfect 50s household that appeared in commercials or magazine ads, but the activities we do in House translate to when we have our own House and play for real.
Perhaps you've heard or spoken this phrase. Perhaps it's been used to refer to a child's game of pretending to be a mother or father, wife or husband, etc participating in household activities. I've heard it a few times referring to relationships, and a thought occurred to me the other day: Do we ever stop playing House?
Whenever I've played house, there's usually a "Mommy", "Daddy", "Baby", and there could be "Sister", referring to the "Baby"'s sister. Sometimes there would be a "Puppy". I will say my school supported heterosexual relationships, at the time I attended; however, if a male was not interested in playing a female would usually assume the role of Daddy. Occasionally, there was no Daddy. Usually, during the game, Daddy went to work, Mommy did the cooking, grocery shopping, cleaning, and attending to Baby, Sister, and Puppy. Baby, Sister, and Puppy would place and intentionally create problems for Mommy. Daddy would come home from work, Mommy would make dinner, and put Baby, Sister and Puppy to bed.
This all sounds like a 50s dream. But in reality, how many of our mothers and fathers do this? And how many of us will continue to do some, if not all, of these actions? Some children play House like some children play Hunting or align their sled dogs. Children learn by imitation, and through imitation they learn relationships, roles and skills. Being Mommy and pretending to cook isn't far off what we do in North American and European cultures, though the role will most likely be different in various schools, in various towns or cities, in various parts around the world.
My House experience, looking back on it, is terribly patriarchal and horribly unfair to Mommy who doesn't get to go to work. But in reality, playing Mommy was usually the funnest because there was so much to do. No one really knew how to play "Daddy" because work was so mysterious. And you'd usually end up playing Work away from the rest of the House group. But for me, House wasn't an accurate representation of life. It was just a way to imitate, and practice, the skills that I had been seeing in my own home. I rarely went to my father's work, and when I did, I would often sneak around his office than watch him work. My mother also had full-time office work, but on weekends, or if she stayed home because I was sick, I would often see her in "Mommy"-like action. My mother would cook and clean, go grocery shopping, play with my sister and I, visit her brothers and sisters, and help provide for our family. Back then, I took for granted what my mother would do on a regular basis. But now I see she's a bit of a superhero!
But homes are changing and there is no shame in expecting to share more responsibilities between partners. But despite the titles of Mommy and Daddy, the functions of the roles in the game House are still relevant. We never stop playing house because we will always be practising, imitating, and reinventing ways to do things. Even though we may be cooking on a real stove, we will always be imitating our parents or that chef on T.V, or maybe our partner. We probably won't have the perfect 50s household that appeared in commercials or magazine ads, but the activities we do in House translate to when we have our own House and play for real.
Thursday 31 May 2012
Go Canada Go!
Perhaps you've heard of Jenna Talackova, a BC beauty queen who changed her gender from male to female at the age of 19. She began horomone therapy at age 14 and is currently in the running for the title of Miss Canada.
Although this is a major win for the LGBT community, I can't help but disagree with some of what these pageants represent. The women who participate in these events seem to be ideal women: large breasted, neat, well-kept hair, straight, white teeth, etc. They are philanthropic and usually have goals to better our world. But are the interviews and the televised question-answer a cover for a glorified beauty contest? Isn't that how these pageants start with young children? Some children compete in pageants where they are solely judged on beauty, and later, when they're older, they show off their talents which can range from dancing, acrobatics, singing, etc. But let's have a look at the main events of beauty contests.
In beauty pageants for young ladies, there is an Evening Gown component where ladies dress up in elegant gowns, walk around the stage and illustrate their poise and regal beauty. In some there is a talent portion and/ or a national or themed costume where ladies perform a talent or show off their national representation via costume or a fun themed dress. There is also a swimsuit portion, which consists mostly of fabulously shaped bodies in scanty bikinis. And the interview where contestants illustrate their mental prowess and hopes and dreams for their future and the future of their world.
It seems, with all of the physical display of these fantastically, symmetrical women, that the interview is a bit of a cheap shot by creators of pageants. Everyone wants to raise young ladies who are thoughtful in addition to beautiful, but do we need to endorse large breasts, expensive dresses and fake tans?
Part of the reason why I would like to see Miss Jenna Talackova as Miss Canada is because she represents a change in gender thinking. Although she conforms to society's definition of female beauty, she has effectively challenged and broken down a barrier for the LGBT community. I hope that her involvement in this competition will provide many other transgender individuals with empowerment.
Although this is a major win for the LGBT community, I can't help but disagree with some of what these pageants represent. The women who participate in these events seem to be ideal women: large breasted, neat, well-kept hair, straight, white teeth, etc. They are philanthropic and usually have goals to better our world. But are the interviews and the televised question-answer a cover for a glorified beauty contest? Isn't that how these pageants start with young children? Some children compete in pageants where they are solely judged on beauty, and later, when they're older, they show off their talents which can range from dancing, acrobatics, singing, etc. But let's have a look at the main events of beauty contests.
In beauty pageants for young ladies, there is an Evening Gown component where ladies dress up in elegant gowns, walk around the stage and illustrate their poise and regal beauty. In some there is a talent portion and/ or a national or themed costume where ladies perform a talent or show off their national representation via costume or a fun themed dress. There is also a swimsuit portion, which consists mostly of fabulously shaped bodies in scanty bikinis. And the interview where contestants illustrate their mental prowess and hopes and dreams for their future and the future of their world.
It seems, with all of the physical display of these fantastically, symmetrical women, that the interview is a bit of a cheap shot by creators of pageants. Everyone wants to raise young ladies who are thoughtful in addition to beautiful, but do we need to endorse large breasts, expensive dresses and fake tans?
Part of the reason why I would like to see Miss Jenna Talackova as Miss Canada is because she represents a change in gender thinking. Although she conforms to society's definition of female beauty, she has effectively challenged and broken down a barrier for the LGBT community. I hope that her involvement in this competition will provide many other transgender individuals with empowerment.
Wednesday 30 May 2012
Have you seen this???
Take a gander at this lovely lady you see in the photo above. No, she's not an ex-beauty pagent queen. Nor is she the wife of a prominent Asian leader. She is Aung San Suu Kyi, world leader in democracy and advocate for Burmese migrants. She won the 1991 Nobel Peace Prize, among others, for human rights and used her winnings to establish a trust fund for the Burmese people.
She was privileged in that she was able to attend British and American universities - lots of girls today don't get a chance to finish highschool, let alone go on to study in a local post-secondary institution (if there is one). But Suu Kyi did not take her education lightly, she used it and her power as a human being to fight for the Burmese people. How many people do you know who would walk towards a squad of guards pointing rifles at them? Begin a hunger strike to ensure the safety of students and advocates of democracy? Not see their husband, dying of prostate cancer, because they would never be allowed back into their home country, never be allowed back to fight for their people?
To me, this woman is a pillar of strength that we can all admire and aspire to be like. To me, this woman shows us that Feminism is not dead; women working to achieve rights for their people (men and women) is still happening, and must continue to happen. So, my dear "Anti-Feminists", take a good look at this woman and think of the years and years where women were not allowed to speak publicly or to go to school or to enter politics. Think about these things and then ask yourself if the world really would be a better place without Feminism.
Trans-jailed
I've been slightly addicted to watching Louis Theroux documentaries on YouTube, and I just have to delve into one about the San Quentin prison. It mostly concerns racial segregation and how people of various races find protection within their own race groups in the jail, but I was deeply interested in an inmate who preferred to be known as Deborah.
A woman in a men's prison? Not quite. Deborah is a transgender woman. My mind was blown. A man, living as a woman, in a men's prison? What I found particularly interesting was the "home-life" she spoke of. Deborah said that the men in the prison who have transgendered cell-mates are appreciative of the feminine air of the cell (not to mention any other physical benefits); she says it's similar to coming home to a sweetie at the end of a hard day, like out in the real world. I wonder what would come of placing Deborah in a women's prison, since she considers herself to be a woman. Would she become a top-dog in a women's prison because of her physical capabilites? Or would she blend in? I wonder if there are any qualities that rub off on her while she is in prison with so many other men. Does she engage in fights? Or is she protected by her partner and other transgender women? From the video, it seems like the conversation Louis has with the couple could have taken place on a porch in a cute suburb. I suppose prisoners, being locked inside for most of the day unless it's their 2 hours of yard time, need someone to connect with sometimes.
After seeing Deborah and her partner together, I wonder what a transgender male would be like in a women's prison. Depending on his physical capacity, he might not be very welcome in the prison. In fact, he might be unwelcome due to his sexual orientation. Who knows?
I find it fascinating that people who spend most of their time shuffling around in a cell all day are able to find a connection with someone on a romantic level.
One homosexual couple that Louis interviewed hadn't slept together, yet they remained an item. They say they're geared more towards companionship. Is all this just desperation to find someone to love? Or is it a true, absolute change of heart towards another gender, or transgender?
A woman in a men's prison? Not quite. Deborah is a transgender woman. My mind was blown. A man, living as a woman, in a men's prison? What I found particularly interesting was the "home-life" she spoke of. Deborah said that the men in the prison who have transgendered cell-mates are appreciative of the feminine air of the cell (not to mention any other physical benefits); she says it's similar to coming home to a sweetie at the end of a hard day, like out in the real world. I wonder what would come of placing Deborah in a women's prison, since she considers herself to be a woman. Would she become a top-dog in a women's prison because of her physical capabilites? Or would she blend in? I wonder if there are any qualities that rub off on her while she is in prison with so many other men. Does she engage in fights? Or is she protected by her partner and other transgender women? From the video, it seems like the conversation Louis has with the couple could have taken place on a porch in a cute suburb. I suppose prisoners, being locked inside for most of the day unless it's their 2 hours of yard time, need someone to connect with sometimes.
After seeing Deborah and her partner together, I wonder what a transgender male would be like in a women's prison. Depending on his physical capacity, he might not be very welcome in the prison. In fact, he might be unwelcome due to his sexual orientation. Who knows?
I find it fascinating that people who spend most of their time shuffling around in a cell all day are able to find a connection with someone on a romantic level.
One homosexual couple that Louis interviewed hadn't slept together, yet they remained an item. They say they're geared more towards companionship. Is all this just desperation to find someone to love? Or is it a true, absolute change of heart towards another gender, or transgender?
Monday 28 May 2012
Zoya's Story
One thing that's on my "Bucket List" is to help (in some fashion) girls in oppressive situations get education; help build a school or help fund educational initiatives.
The story that inspired me to put this on my list is called Zoya's Story. Published in 2002, Zoya shows readers a young-Afghani woman's struggles to grow up and be educated in a tumultuous area. Although it's not written with the prowess of Chaucer, it's more than an easy read. Women who lead privileged lives, such as myself, don't see beyond their own progressive borders. By reading Zoya's story, my attention drew beyond North America, and my interest in promoting equality grew. Zoya has been through more than a teenage boy has experienced playing Call of Duty. This book is a must read! Although, I have to admit, it give a sense of "we're right and you're wrong" to first-world people, but it shouldn't be the norm for women to have to sneak reading and writing materials into homes. There shouldn't be guards with guns outside schools to protect the women and children from being shot at. Women, as human beings, have a right to education. My idealist hope is that one day we will all have an opportunity for equal education. Whether this will happen in my lifetime, at all, is, sadly, unknown.
The story that inspired me to put this on my list is called Zoya's Story. Published in 2002, Zoya shows readers a young-Afghani woman's struggles to grow up and be educated in a tumultuous area. Although it's not written with the prowess of Chaucer, it's more than an easy read. Women who lead privileged lives, such as myself, don't see beyond their own progressive borders. By reading Zoya's story, my attention drew beyond North America, and my interest in promoting equality grew. Zoya has been through more than a teenage boy has experienced playing Call of Duty. This book is a must read! Although, I have to admit, it give a sense of "we're right and you're wrong" to first-world people, but it shouldn't be the norm for women to have to sneak reading and writing materials into homes. There shouldn't be guards with guns outside schools to protect the women and children from being shot at. Women, as human beings, have a right to education. My idealist hope is that one day we will all have an opportunity for equal education. Whether this will happen in my lifetime, at all, is, sadly, unknown.
Sunday 27 May 2012
G is for Gender?
When I think of men vs. women, I always wonder how this division came about and what it really means.
Gender is a construction in an attempt to create order and define different groups of human beings. But how can we possibly define genders with the amount of gender bending going on? What springs to my mind is "transgender". How can you possibly attempt to define someone who has made the transition from one gender to another? How can you define what gender someone is when they feel they don't fit into a category? What if you identify with both? Can you imagine not fitting in because you don't feel your physical attributes contribute to the definition of who you are?
Gender only serves to pit humans against other humans due to their differences. Gender attempts to dictate how you dress, how you rebel, your acceptable careers, your movements, your gestures, your eating habits... You name it. In order to achieve equality, gender will need to disappear. But this means that all sorts of words will also need to disappear. Man, woman, he, she, mother, father, aunt, uncle, daughter, son, grandmother, grandfather, girl, boy, niece, nephew, husband, wife. (You get the idea.)
But how would our societies be able to function without these words that we've been using for so long? Judith Butler says that these gendered words includes all sorts of societal influences which oppress said genders. I agree, but I always come back to the question, How? How would you control the words that come out of 7 billion mouths?
The only thing that we can do in order to amend this "gender mystique" is to include more gendered terms. We need to apply new terms to people who can't be defined by the tradition man/woman terms. Perhaps the road we need to take is not one of extermination of gender terms, but inclusivity.
Gender is a construction in an attempt to create order and define different groups of human beings. But how can we possibly define genders with the amount of gender bending going on? What springs to my mind is "transgender". How can you possibly attempt to define someone who has made the transition from one gender to another? How can you define what gender someone is when they feel they don't fit into a category? What if you identify with both? Can you imagine not fitting in because you don't feel your physical attributes contribute to the definition of who you are?
Gender only serves to pit humans against other humans due to their differences. Gender attempts to dictate how you dress, how you rebel, your acceptable careers, your movements, your gestures, your eating habits... You name it. In order to achieve equality, gender will need to disappear. But this means that all sorts of words will also need to disappear. Man, woman, he, she, mother, father, aunt, uncle, daughter, son, grandmother, grandfather, girl, boy, niece, nephew, husband, wife. (You get the idea.)
But how would our societies be able to function without these words that we've been using for so long? Judith Butler says that these gendered words includes all sorts of societal influences which oppress said genders. I agree, but I always come back to the question, How? How would you control the words that come out of 7 billion mouths?
The only thing that we can do in order to amend this "gender mystique" is to include more gendered terms. We need to apply new terms to people who can't be defined by the tradition man/woman terms. Perhaps the road we need to take is not one of extermination of gender terms, but inclusivity.
Tuesday 22 May 2012
First Post!
Welcome to Chowin Down!
After multiple comments and postings on YouTube videos, I decided I should start a blog so that I can share my opinions without annoying video posters with too many responses to other comments. Here we go!
In Which I Confront My Own Beliefs Concerning Feminism
I watch my fair share of YouTube videos, but one video caught my eye. It was a woman who claimed to be an "anti-Feminist". This confused me. How can a woman with a YouTube channel, who shares her thoughts, talents, and beliefs and values be against Femenism? I desperately wanted to write back to this woman, and this made me consider my own definition about Feminism. What is Feminism?
My first thought was that I can't narrow down my personal definition and include others'; it would have to be tailored to my beliefs (as all 'isms are). I know I don't believe that women or men are more valuable than the other. I believe that men and women complement each other in terms of physical functions (men generally being predisposed to more muscles, and women being predisposed to deliver babies). However, these attributes (and others) that make our genders - and any new cross or mixed gender - do not achieve higher status than others. It was this strong belief that led me to my current understanding of what Feminism is to me: my Feminism is solely about equality.
I am reading The Feminine Mystique by Betty Friedan, and my eye was caught by one of the most obvious statements: early feminists of the 1920s were looking up to men as role models when they were beginning their fight for women's rights. These women would look at the outside world that men were involved in and say, "I want to be a part of that" NOT "I want that to be MY world, run by MY rules". Early feminists called attention to the fact that women think just as much as men do about the world. When the War was happening, women were employed in factories, doing what was usually considered "men's work". They were employed with the army as nurses and aides. I've heard about one woman who dressed as a man and drove a delivery truck during the war. Women were not concerned with "stealing" men's jobs, they were concerned with the War effort. I can definitely believe the first taste of contributing to society would be addicting.
These early feminists are my role models. They were fighting for rights to speak in public, the right to education, the right to work. They were not fighting against men, just for the barriers that prevented them from sharing their views as human beings. I strongly believe that our connection as human beings comes before gender. I believe that the goal of Feminism is to make itself obsolete. When Feminism no longer exists, when women no longer feel the need to fight for equality, that is when we will have all recognized our human-ness.
When I look back on the video this woman posted, and the comments that offended me as a woman and a feminist, I have to pause and give silent congratulations to these early freedom fighters. This woman would not be on YouTube, speaking to a large public, sharing her personal views, if not for women like Lucy Stone, Sojourner Truth, and Louisa May Alcott. Although she may not know it, this woman is building on the foundation of these pioneer Feminists. She is advocating for her right to speak as a woman, to women.
My Feminist beliefs do not seek to alienate or target men as bad people. I value men as a counter-part to our society and respect those who contribute to keeping the core values of Feminism alive. In fact, I respect anyone, of any sex, who stands up for Feminist beliefs.
To those who seriously oppose Feminism, I suggest you do your research into its history, founders, struggles, and the key values it supports. Equality is the love boat we can all get on; no matter our "ism".
After multiple comments and postings on YouTube videos, I decided I should start a blog so that I can share my opinions without annoying video posters with too many responses to other comments. Here we go!
In Which I Confront My Own Beliefs Concerning Feminism
I watch my fair share of YouTube videos, but one video caught my eye. It was a woman who claimed to be an "anti-Feminist". This confused me. How can a woman with a YouTube channel, who shares her thoughts, talents, and beliefs and values be against Femenism? I desperately wanted to write back to this woman, and this made me consider my own definition about Feminism. What is Feminism?
My first thought was that I can't narrow down my personal definition and include others'; it would have to be tailored to my beliefs (as all 'isms are). I know I don't believe that women or men are more valuable than the other. I believe that men and women complement each other in terms of physical functions (men generally being predisposed to more muscles, and women being predisposed to deliver babies). However, these attributes (and others) that make our genders - and any new cross or mixed gender - do not achieve higher status than others. It was this strong belief that led me to my current understanding of what Feminism is to me: my Feminism is solely about equality.
I am reading The Feminine Mystique by Betty Friedan, and my eye was caught by one of the most obvious statements: early feminists of the 1920s were looking up to men as role models when they were beginning their fight for women's rights. These women would look at the outside world that men were involved in and say, "I want to be a part of that" NOT "I want that to be MY world, run by MY rules". Early feminists called attention to the fact that women think just as much as men do about the world. When the War was happening, women were employed in factories, doing what was usually considered "men's work". They were employed with the army as nurses and aides. I've heard about one woman who dressed as a man and drove a delivery truck during the war. Women were not concerned with "stealing" men's jobs, they were concerned with the War effort. I can definitely believe the first taste of contributing to society would be addicting.
These early feminists are my role models. They were fighting for rights to speak in public, the right to education, the right to work. They were not fighting against men, just for the barriers that prevented them from sharing their views as human beings. I strongly believe that our connection as human beings comes before gender. I believe that the goal of Feminism is to make itself obsolete. When Feminism no longer exists, when women no longer feel the need to fight for equality, that is when we will have all recognized our human-ness.
When I look back on the video this woman posted, and the comments that offended me as a woman and a feminist, I have to pause and give silent congratulations to these early freedom fighters. This woman would not be on YouTube, speaking to a large public, sharing her personal views, if not for women like Lucy Stone, Sojourner Truth, and Louisa May Alcott. Although she may not know it, this woman is building on the foundation of these pioneer Feminists. She is advocating for her right to speak as a woman, to women.
My Feminist beliefs do not seek to alienate or target men as bad people. I value men as a counter-part to our society and respect those who contribute to keeping the core values of Feminism alive. In fact, I respect anyone, of any sex, who stands up for Feminist beliefs.
To those who seriously oppose Feminism, I suggest you do your research into its history, founders, struggles, and the key values it supports. Equality is the love boat we can all get on; no matter our "ism".
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)